Belfast and Beyond: Local and International Narratives of Physical Segregation

5 Belfast and Beyond: Local and international narratives of physical segregation Jonny Byrne When a city is redeveloped a pattern of life is laid down for at least a century…I find myself in disagreement on the proposals that the divisions in the community should be accepted as a feature of life for a hundred years or more. This seems a counsel of despair. A despair, which it is proposed, 1 should be expressed in terms of bricks and mortar. Introduction This passage was taken from a written exchange between civil servants in 2 1971 about the issue of peace lines and security fences in Belfast. They were debating the impact and merits of physical division as a response to the increase in communal violence and disorder. It is obvious from the above extract that there were concerns as to the long-term implications of the peace lines on the population of the city. Forty years on, much of Belfast’s identity has become synonymous with ethnic division through physical lines of demarcation. Although, Northern Ireland has entered into a period of political stability and significant progress has been achieved through the peace process, the peace walls remain a visible reminder of the violence of the past, and the differences which continue to exist between communities. Recently, a series 3 of initiatives have been engineered at both statutory and community levels to consider the issue of peace lines in Belfast, and to examine methods, which could lead to the transformation and removal of peace lines across Loyalist and Republican communities. Furthermore, a brief review of recent local and national strategies and action plans provides additional evidence of the increased attention currently being placed on the issue of peace lines. The ‘Cohesion, Sharing and Integration’ (2010) consultation document published through the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister; the Department for Justice’s ‘Building Safer, Shared, and Confident 6 Shared Space: A research journal on peace, conflict and community relations in Northern Ireland Communities’ (2011) document; and the Belfast City Council’s ‘Investment Programme: 2012-2015’ consultation document place emphases, both directly and indirectly, on the regeneration of interface communities, and the transformation and removal of peace lines. The purpose of this paper is to explore in detail the factors which have contributed to the rise in popularity of peace lines as a policy issue at both local and national government. While Belfast and Northern Ireland is often 4 seen as ‘a place apart’ , it is important to emphasize that many other cities and countries have implemented policies which have resulted in forced segregation and division through the construction of walls, barriers and fences. Therefore, it is important to introduce the reader to the use of walls and barriers in an international context, before drilling down to the specificities of Northern Ireland in general, and Belfast, in particular. The focus then shifts to an explanation of the actual significance of these peace lines within the current peace and political process. Conflicted cities, walls and public policy There is a large body of literature, which has considered the range of cities and countries which have been characterised by division and notions of 5 contested space. Collectively the literature highlights the importance which different ethnic, social and religious groups within urban settings place on territory and space, and the subsequent intergroup polarisation which manifests itself as a direct result of the differing dynamics and positions. 6 Academics and scholars have also noted that cities are constantly dividing geographically by ethnicity, race, religion, income and age. However, when that division and segregation transforms into violence it becomes urban polarisation, which is viewed as a deep, intractable form of urban conflict experienced when ethnic and nationalist assertions come together and impact 7 8 on the administration of the city at a local level. It has also been suggested that a contested city denotes a place where diversity is not viewed as an asset but as a source of competing territorial claims, segregation, intimidation and more often than not, violence and disorder. For example, in cities such as 9 Belfast, Beirut, Nicosia, Jerusalem, and Mostar, group ethnicity is often tied to: political affiliation; a history of institutional discrimination; issues and concerns around physical security; questions regarding the legitimacy of policing; and shifting relationships between the majority and minority ethnic communities. More often than not, these micro-level disputes are played out in the geography of the city and are reflective of the larger macro-level issues which, in turn, dominate issues of governance, politics and policy. Belfast and Beyond: Local and international narratives of physical segregation 7 The subject of walls in partitioned and divided cities has been well documented, with specific attention placed on the social, economic and political segregation that is a direct outcome of the physical lines of 10 demarcation. From a theoretical perspective the idea of a ‘wall’ assumes very different meaning and assumptions depending on one’s discipline and field. However, there is a clear consensus that the term ‘wall’ alludes to an element of separation, a border or boundary, whether it is in a tangible or intangible 11 form. The use of walls by cities and countries to demarcate territory and 12 provide defensible structures is not a new concept. Scholars have consistently highlighted the relationship between walls and cities, and the significant role walls play in, not only defining territory, but also shaping identity and generating civic spirit. The literature also maintains that walls and barriers are, for the most part, short-term policy fixes that have been designed as a response to specific emergencies. And in most cases there is reluctance from policy makers and local administrators to address the subject of physical barriers because they are a reflection of a failed policy and their own inability to address communal differences. In their defence, there is a consensus among advocates of partition that, although the barricades are aesthetically unpleasing, they address intercommunal violence quickly, and are more cost effective when compared to regular policing responses. Walls as a policy response Physical segregation has emerged over the last fifty years as one of the most popular and myopic solutions to intergroup violence in the urban 13 environment . What follows is a series of examples from a range of cities and countries which have adopted policies that have resulted the building of physical lines of demarcation. Regardless of the rationale, the construction of barriers and walls appears to instill a sense of safety and confidence within communities and governments, and is furthermore a visible and tangible response to a specific issue or problem. In recent years these issues have more often than not centred on concerns around terrorism, ethnic communal violence, and immigration. There are several examples of cities which have undergone significant structural changes because of the construction of barriers to separate different community and ethnic groups. These include Beirut, the capital of Lebanon, where widespread violence, and an ensuing civil war in 1975 involving Christians and Muslims, resulted in the construction of a fortified path 14 approximately 9km long, known as the Green Line through the capital city. The division followed the main North-South traffic corridor within the city, 8 Shared Space: A research journal on peace, conflict and community relations in Northern Ireland and it was not until 1990, after constitutional reforms, that the civil war was concluded and the Green Line dividing Beirut was dismantled. Mostar, a city and municipality in Bosnia-Herzegovina, experienced deep division as a result of the construction of physical barricades, built in response to ethnic cleansing by Croatian paramilitary units against local Muslim residents in the early 1990s. A partition line was created, which followed the path of the river along with the main thoroughfare in the city, which separated the various ethnic groups. The barricades consisted of asphalt, concrete, sandbags, barbed wire, 15 and derelict houses. Since March 1994, upon the unification of the state, the partition line fortifications and checkpoints have been dismantled. The city of Jerusalem, positioned in Israel and Palestine, has a history of 16 physical partition between the different religious and ethnic groups. In 1962 the Green Line constituted a physical barricade through the city consisting of barbed wire, defensive ramparts, corrugated iron fencing and land mines. These barricades were removed in 1967 following the conclusion of the Six- Day War and brought the unification of Jerusalem after nineteen years of division. However, since 2006 the Israeli government has been constructing a separation barrier along its border with Palestine, which has resulted in parts of Jerusalem once again being divided along ethno-religious lines. Other cities that are considered divided and contested include Nicosia, the capital of Cyprus, which has been divided along ethnic lines since 1964 when an International Peacekeeping Force established a ceasefire line (known as the Green Line) which separated the island into two distinct sides. By 1974 this barrier had become impassable and the country

Load more